W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > November 2009

Re: [RIF-OWL] Naming OWL semantic notions [was: Re: ISSUE: OWL-DL compatibility]

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 10:20:37 +0100
Message-ID: <4B03BC65.2000001@w3.org>
To: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
CC: Chris Welty <cawelty@gmail.com>, RIF WG Public list <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Jos et al,

sorry to chime in, only on small item. After some discussion in the SW
Coordination Group, the set of URI-s for entailment regimes has been set
up at:

http://www.w3.org/ns/entailment/

see that file for the respective URI-s. I guess these can now be used
for the table in section 5.1.1. These URI-s have been set up on request
of Axel in order to use the same URI-s in RIF and, for example, in the
new version of SPARQL.

Thanks

Ivan

Jos de Bruijn wrote:
> It was not a simple search and replace because we now have to
> differentiate between terminology we use in the syntactic and
> terminology we use in the semantic world.
> The ontologies (and thus also combinations) we are concerned with are
> OWL 2 DL and OWL 2 Full. The notions of satisfiability, model, and
> entailment are OWL 2 Direct and OWL 2 RDF-Based.
> 
> Updating the introduction and sections 4 and 9 was straightforward,
> except that one might dispute the names of the subsections 4.2.1 and
> 4.2.2 [they were "OWL Full" and "OWL DL"; I renamed them to "OWL
> RDF-based semantics" and "OWL direct semantics", respectively]
> 
> In section 5 (input profiles) we have the URIs of the profiles, which I
> changed to reflect the semantics of the imports of OWL ontologies.
> However, the URIs are still to be finalized.
> 
> In section 6 (conformance) I currently speak about conformant
> Core/BLD-OWL Direct and RDF-Based consumers and producers.  However, I
> guess one might argue that consumed/produced are RDF-OWL DL/Full
> combinations, and thus one should speak about conformant Core/BLD-OWL
> DL/Full consumers and producers.
> Opinions?
> 
> 
> Best, Jos
> 
> 
>> On a different but related note, Ian Horrocks posted a public comment
>> that the new terminology for that-formerly-known-as-OWL-DL is "OWL
>> Direct Semantics", and for that-formerly-known-as-OWL-Full is "OWL
>> RDF-based Semantics" (see
>> [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-comments/2009Nov/0001.html])
>>
>>
>> I think a quick fix would be to replace "OWL Full" with "OWL RDF-based
>> Semantics" and replace "OWL-DL" with "OWL Direct Semantics".  This isn't
>> precisely correct in general, but I think based on the way we use the
>> difference (between OWL Full and OWL DL), it works.
>>
>> This doesn't change anything fundamental so its clearly just a bug fix,
>> if you are willing to make the change.  Are you?
>>
>> -Chris
>>
> 

-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

Received on Wednesday, 18 November 2009 09:21:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 18 November 2009 09:21:09 GMT